Allahabad High Court
Yasmeen Alias Yaseen vs State Of U.P. on 13 June, 2025
Author: Neeraj Tiwari
Bench: Neeraj Tiwari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:96700
Court No. - 49
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 4618 of 2025
Applicant :- Yasmeen Alias Yaseen
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Ashraf
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
This application (under Section 482 BNSS) has been moved by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.94 of 2025, under Sections 3/5A/8 Cow Slaughter Act and Section 61(2) BNS, Police Station Izzat Nagar, District- Bareilly, during the pendency of investigation.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case by the police to show the good job. He next submits that the present FIR has been lodged against unknown persons. Applicant has not arrested on spot. As per prosecutions story, that on 05.02.2025, informant has given information to the police that when he was visited his Company (SAHARA) then he saw on the west side of the ground that some cow flesh are lying there which was put there by some unknown persons. He further submits that another FIR has been lodged on 19.02.2025, wherein, some named persons have been arrested and on the confessional statement of Waseem, the name of the applicant has been disclosed that he was involved in the case which has been lodged on 05.02.2025. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. There is criminal history of one case under Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC against the applicant which has been explained in paragraph no.3 of the supplementary affidavit. He further submits that it cannot be a ground to implicate the applicant on confessional statement. Lastly he submits that the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. In case, the applicant is released on anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the said facts.
Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, he is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail.
Let the applicant-Yasmeen Alias Yaseen involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
(1) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;
(2) The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and
(3) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(4) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(5) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.
(6) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.
(7) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against his in accordance with law.
In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 13.6.2025
I.A.Siddiqui
